The human brain has a wonderful facility for masking rationality. It's called the EGO. Somebody dared to use HIS word, and must stop or pay. What does he do about the Olive Oil companies, or, better, the Catholic Church?

No, no, you don't understand. It ain't the populace that's braindead (see response to SOPA, PIPA, ACTA, etc.), it's the Politicians. Their meager brains have been so overwhelmed by all of that green and white stuff, including money, they are inundated with that they can't think. How many sane, rational people do you know that would make the kinds of decisions and judgements that they do? What do you expect?

Interesting question: has ANYBODY, besides a TSA insider, actually seen one of these machines in action at an active airport. Perhaps the "Theater" is more profound than we think. Maybe it's ALL theater, and they are just bullies getting off on humiliating the public. If the nudie machines were just empty, non-functional shells that we were paying millions for, that might explain the TSA's reluctance. Follow the money. FBI: who's getting rich off this scam I'm paying for? WE'd like to know.

If my understanding of what Neilson is after is correct (and that is certainly suspect), the cable companies can and do collect data on all of their channels from all of their subscribers. Couldn't they sell that data to Neilson, at least the bulk numbers of how many sets are tuned to what. The cable boxes know.

Sir:
You are, as far as I can determine, exactly correct, if a little harsh. With one notable exception, all of the papers I have been able to research require the same standard of accuracy in their opinion pages as they do in their op-ed or news pages. My apologies to you and the other readers. I was apparently shooting from the hip, and not checking MY facts.

Which leads to the next question: WHY was this "opinion" allowed to be published when it was so extensively and obviously wrong? Was it just for the controversy or the attantion? I'd like to know.

Sorry, Sir, but you're dead wrong, and trampling on the First Amendment. The WSJ is NOT responsible for the veracity of columns on the Opinion page, even when they are grossly incorrect and/or misinformed. It's still his opinion, and is not presented as a news story. The paper has the option of not publishing if they disagree with it.

In fact, I wouldn't put it past the Editor to have published that piece for exactly the result he got, lots of ink and pixels for an organ that is slowly fading into the editorial sunset like most other dead-tree outlets.

Don't you folks read the page or are you so wound up about the "errors" you didn't notice?
Crovitz' column is an OPINION piece, so atated, and on the Opinion page. Who cares WHAT this clown says? IT"S HIS OPINION! Nowhere does that page state that WSJ backs it or has researched it. Pay attention, people. Sheesh!

I'm not particularly sexist, well, maybe a little. It seems to me, from what I've read lately, that the most vehement maximalists in public office, and the persons most likely to slam a defendant, are female. I wonder why.

You're dead wrong, jakerome. They are not only fully aware of selling out, they actively solicit buyers at every turn. Again, they regard Federal Service as license to print money and secure their own future and wealth. That is their ONLY motivation, Law, decency, and the Constitution be damned.

There ya go. THAT'S a great copyright claim. Maybe it'll get Greece out of the doghouse. We, the rest of the world, owe Greece US$150,000 PER athlete, per game for every Olympic Game performance ever held. Should be about 100 times the total GNP of Earth.

IMHO, the only effective test for web performance would be a measurement made every five minutes for a period of one week, between two points on the network. This would be repeated for every major node, for each ISP, in every city in the US, on identical off-the-shelf equipment running identical open-source software (assuming multiple tests were run at the same time). Might get a little expensive for the tester, and take years, but we'd at least have valid data.

We're in a race between those who would eat away our civil rights a little at a time, and those who would obliterate the Constitution wholesale. The only remaining question is how long it will take before the police state becomes official.

I think it works like this:
1. Olympic show is expensive.
2. City hosting show must fund it, and provide venue.
3. City appeals to corporations for money, with IOC blessing
4. Corporations, just because they can, impose severe restrictions on city and IOC as condition of granting money.
5. City and IOC, in order to protect their funds, go completely off the end of the pier. Remember, the corporations can pull their money whenever they like for whatever reason, or none.

IMHO, said corporations should be held legally responsible for ALL funding after they agreed. This especially means funding the athletes, instead of making them beg for money.

As far as I'm concerned, this whole thing is a total cluster*^$% and has been getting worse each time it's put on. I have NO INTENTION of wasting my time or resources on it. If, in the bloody unlikely event, I need information, there's always the internet.